Being a proud Atheist, and a freedom loving INFIDEL AKA "KUFFAR", WE are threatened by the primitive pidgeon chested jihad boys in the medieval east.
FRACK YOU!! SAY US ALL!! Don't annoy the Pagans and Bikers,, it's a islam FREE ZONE!!! LAN ASTASLEM!!!!

Friday, April 30, 2010

When Arizona passed a law enforcing a Federal statute, Liberals across America reacted with their usual calm and rational approach of invoking the Nazis, boycotting anything with Arizona in its name including products that are not actually made in Arizona, and threatening a barrage of civil suits and protests to counter a law that the majority of Arizonians and Americans support.

The irony is that only a few weeks after the media was busy warning us ominously about all the hate and extremist anti-government rhetoric in the Tea Party movement, it has done a Full 180 and is now itself indulging in hateful anti-government rhetoric. Soon enough the very same reporters who spoke out on the dangers of people protesting on behalf of their Constitutional rights, will be speaking out on how wonderful it is to have illegal aliens protesting for their rights in major cities.

The objections to the bill aren't about fairness toward individuals. After all this Congress and this Administration just passed a law compelling everyone to buy health insurance on the suspicion that one of them might get into an accident and cost the government money. At least that was the rationalization that Obama himself used in an interview. But the liberal hypocrisy on preventative policing allows them to call for preventative policing of factories because they might possibly pollute, opposition protests because they might possibly get out of hand and individuals because they might possibly not pay for their own health care-- while vocally opposing preventative policing in Arizona. Because it's fair to fine law abiding citizens hundreds of dollars for just breathing, but it's unfair for police to enforce an existing law.

This isn't about Federalism either. Liberals have cheered on states and sanctuary cities that refused to cooperate with immigration authorities. Because just like anti-government rhetoric, state governments defying the Federal authorities is one of those things that's right when it's progressive and wrong when it's conservative. But while that sort of ideological moral compass whose needle always points left may be fine for those already on the left, most Americans aren't buying it. And that is because they don't see illegal immigration as a political issue, but as a problem that needs solving.

Where Democrats and some Republicans see a potential voting base, most Americans just see an unregulated workforce in a time of high unemployment and a drain on social services. And they see most politicians being more eager to cover their asses than to do something about. Which is why they support the Governor of Arizona, and not the little man with the big ears in the White House. While the latter has leveraged his power to create a nanny state, the former actually took steps to solve what most residents consider to be a problem.

The current immigration mess is a volatile situation that liberals created for their own benefit, and are outraged at the thought that their agenda might be thwarted. The Democratic party's "gut liberal" reaction was as usual a mistake. And no amount of MSNBC goosestepping rhetoric will change that. The "gut liberal" reaction plays really well in 1 percent of the country and falls flat everywhere else. And Obama's aggressive push against Arizona will just serve to remind voters again that his centrism was an election day glaze covering up a hard left center.

Arizona's action not only cuts off the Obama Administration at the pass for its Amnesty plans, but takes the populist position at a time when Democratic politicians are already terrified of the upcoming midterm elections. Obama and Congress thought that they could decide when to launch their amnesty campaign at their own leisure. But now their hand has been forced, and the polls are stacked against them. Naturally they will retaliate in the usual community organizer way, through the press, through political intimidation, and through their own rights organizations which will "monitor the situation" searching for an incident they can exploit. But it is now an uphill battle.

And Arizona's actions have wider implications beyond immigration. Under Barack Hussein Obama, the government has badly neglected its core functions of protecting Americans from external threats, in favor of its round of socialist charades. Now Washington D.C. has been put on notice that the states will act, even if Washington D.C. does not. And in the Federal government will not enforce the law, there are state governments that will. Immigration is not the end of it. The War on Terror remains an obvious area where the government has neglected its responsibilities in order to curry favor with Islam. And the next time an Islamic terrorist kills civilians in a more independent minded state, its residents may also decide that serious enforcement is needed.

The fundamental gap between the worldview of the left, in which government manages the lives of the people under its authority, and that of ordinary Americans, in which government protects the people against overriding external threats, has opened up in Arizona. But not just in Arizona. Because with the left in the driver's seat in D.C., there is no one to look out for American interests either globally or locally. To the left, a Mexican illegal alien is no different than a US citizen, because they don't recognize nations as valid entities. And for all that Obama wraps himself in the flag when convenient, over the last year his actions have begun to speak louder than words.

Obama not only does not believe in American Exceptionalism, though he summons that too in his speeches when convenient, but he does not see himself as an American leader, only as the head of an authority that governs the people in his jurisdiction, regardless of legal status. America to him is just Chicago writ large. And that's the way he governs. His national politics are no different than his local politics. Just louder and with a bigger impact, and more money to take in and spread around. Washington D.C. is nothing but the new base of his political machine. And like his colleagues on the left, he sees what is going on in Arizona in terms of class and racial warfare, a mindset that leaves him unable to sympathize with the valid concerns of the people of Arizona.

To the current regime, there are no Americans... only people who happen to live in America. Warm bodies who are capable of providing resources for the government, and consuming resources to be repaid with loyalty. The populations of countries are to them like game pieces on a Risk board, objects on a map to be moved around in order to claim voting districts. And so the Democrats have been moving Third World immigrants into America, for the same reasons that Labor moved Muslim immigrants into Europe. Power. Political power. That is what it comes down to in the end.

The Democrats' tone deafness on immigration originates from the extent to which they have tied their own political fortunes to the demographic transformation of America. And to their disconnection from the idea of America as anything but a logo and a flag, more akin to a sports team than anything of substance. They don't see why anyone would object to pieces being moved around the board, after all it's just pieces, which means in their minds the only objection has to be to their color. Because when you engage in class and racial warfare, you assume that everyone else is too, and that you are only acting in self-defense. And thus follow the accusations of Nazism, Fascism and Racism. When in fact the majority of Latinos in Arizona support the law, precisely because they have the most to lose from the collapse of social services and the export of Mexico's Cartel Culture into the United States.

Not that the Republicans don't own their fair share of the blame. The Republican party has taken too much money from the US Chamber of Commerce (which is rather liberal on immigration) and numerous corporations that directly or indirectly profit from illegal aliens to ever do more than talk tough about it. Add on a few Republican politicians afraid of losing their limited portion of the Latino vote by opening themselves up to liberal accusations of racism, and other Republicans politicians who shamelessly "farm" the illegal immigration issue, but have absolutely no interest in seeing anything done about it-- and there's plenty of reasons for the GOP's general inaction.

And so all too we often we have Republican Presidents and Senators who push a softer line. We have Republican congressmen who say the right things, but know that too many of their donors are running plants filled with illegals, and that either enforcement or amnesty would hurt them badly. (And what's more the Democrats know it too, which is what gives them their boldness on an issue that in theory should be an easy populist home run for the GOP.) Finally of course there are the firebrand Republican politicians who seem all fired up about illegal immigration, and are willing to campaign on the issue, but run the other way when an actual measure is passed that might make a dent in the situation. And that's because they want to exploit the problem, not solve it.

But the current economic crisis and its accompanying unemployment have mobilized public hostility to any idea of legalization, and strengthened a push for enforcement. Arizona is moving with the public sentiment, the Democrats are swimming against it, because they've once again forgotten about the same economic crisis that they exploited to leverage themselves into power. The Republican party right now is being powered by populism, because its leading figures have no ideas, just conferences, those of them that aren't jockeying for a 2012 run. And the smart populist money says enforcement.

This is still only the opening round on immigration. Arizona has forced Obama's hand. The Democrats hope to find a silver lining by exploiting the issue in order to bring out Latino and minority voters out of a generally moribund midterm election turnout. But they might not be counting on how many other voters they will bring out as well. It's doubtful that even the Democrats think they have a winning hand on the issue, but they're also depending on changing the demographics of the electorate in order to play the long game. And just as with health care, they might be prepared to accept short term defeat in 2010 and even in 2012, in order to achieve long term political gains. Because they're counting on a Republican party too timid to reverse their policies once it's in power. And nationally they may be right. Which is why it be up to the states to do the right thing, after all.

The “Big Hollywood” commentary below (highlights added) is right on target. This is much more than the censorship of an animated TV satirical comedy. When one not-so-veiled Islamist threat is enough to make even Comedy Central knuckle under we’d better get concerned—and off our sofas!

These dots aren’t hard to connect:

Islamist threatens TV network.

Network caves.

Message to other Islamists: Issue threats against anyone who “offends” you and they’ll capitulate.

And so the cycle of intimidation continues—until Americans rise up and say “enough!”

Here’s what Mark Tapson says below in his closing paragraph:

Unless Americans stand shoulder-to-shoulder against such assaults on our hard-won Western values, Islamic fundamentalists will continue to be more effective at importing sharia law than we are at exporting democracy.

Or even defending democracy! We will be standing “shoulder to shoulder” in our nation’s capital June 27 – 29 at the ACT! for America National Conference and Legislative Briefing. Join featured speakers Brigitte Gabriel, Andrew McCarthy, former CIA Director James Woolsey, Muslim Mafia co-author Paul Sperry, and ACT! for America chapter leaders and members from across the country. For more information,click here.

Registerby April 30th at the “Patriot” level and receive an additional benefit at no extra cost—a private breakfast reception with Brigitte.

“Red lines” indeed – a phrase chillingly reminiscent of Samuel Huntington’s famous observation that “Islam has bloody borders.” Except that the red lines the OIC is referring to aren’t geographical – they are the ever-tightening limits that Muslim fundamentalists are imposing to choke off our freedoms.

The influential OIC is the world’s largest Muslim assembly, consisting of 57 member states (you know, thesame number of U.S. states(candidate Obama campaigned in). Its primary aim is “conducting a large-scale worldwide effort to confront Islamophobia.” As I’vewritten here before, Islamophobia is a mythical beast that the OIC and collusive groups like CAIR, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, use to intimidate us into craven appeasement.) Their goal is to abridge our free speech by making criticism of Islam an international crime; their strategy works because the West has been so emasculated by multiculturalism that we’d rather embrace cultural suicide than offend the tender sensibilities of such violent barbarians as the Danish cartoon rioters.

Everyone is aware by now that Comedy Central’s South Park creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone were targeted by anot-so-subtle threat from Zachary “Abu Talhah Al-Amrikee” Chesser, the leader of a small New York-based group of fanatics at RevolutionMuslim.com. Chesser found the fearless South Park satirists guilty of an insulting depiction of Islam’s prophet Muhammad as someone who – wait for it – cannot be depicted without incurring death threats. To drive his point home, Chesser posted a picture of Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh lying on an Amsterdam sidewalk, shot several times in broad daylight by an unrepentant Islamic fundamentalist, his throat cut, a machete stuck in his chest and a note calling for holy war pinned to him with a second knife. The message was clear – van Gogh had been executed for insulting Islam with his short film Submission, and now Parker and Stone can expect the same fate.

The site RevolutionMuslim.com is now down, but at the related RevolutionMuslim.blogspot.com is an exhaustingly wide-ranging, unapologeticdeclarationwith the catchy title, “Clarifying the South Park Response and Calling on Others to Join in the Defense of the Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him).” Far from backing off from the implied threat, the declaration’s poster – presumably Chesser – launches into an anti-American rant and a scholarly justification for Islam’s position that the punishment for blasphemy is death. He stresses that it is absolutely incumbent upon all Muslims to abide by sharia law, so any Muslim who “condones” South Park’s behavior does not possess “even the weakest of faith.” So much for moderate Islam.

But what about freedom of speech? “As Muslims we do not define speech which has no place in a moral society as ‘free speech.’” Indeed, free speech “is not a value that the Muslims share with America as a whole.” The declaration closes with an ominous quote from Chesser’s idol Osama bin Laden: “If there is no check in the freedom of your words, then let your hearts be open to the freedom of our actions.” Well there it is, then. We can either curb our speech, or cross that red line and deal with the consequences from Muslims who are commanded, by Islamic law, to execute us.

In reporting on this controversy, the media have, as usual, resorted to their fallback narrative of describing Islamic fundamentalists as “loners” and “crazy people” who have hijacked what would otherwise be the Religion of Peace.The danger in these dismissive labels is that we mistakenly view the terrorists as isolated nut jobs, when in fact they are united by a common goal – the capitulation of the West and the establishment of sharia worldwide – and they are perfectly capable of articulating and ideologically justifying it. Whether the dozen or so members of Revolution Muslim and the 57-member states of the OIC are officially linked or not, they are working toward the same end.

CAIR’s ubiquitous spokesperson Ibrahim Hoopercalls Revolution Muslim “an extreme fringe group” that is smearing Islam with its “outrageous, irresponsible” statements. But CAIR hasn’t issued a formal statement about the affair, ostensibly because it doesn’t want to give South Park any more attention. Too bad, because amid all this uproar, CAIR is throwing away a golden opportunity to explain exactly how these “crazies” have “hijacked” the religion. This would be the perfect time to discredit their “outrageous, irresponsible” distortions, wouldn’t it? And to stand with the South Park creators in defense of free speech?

Instead, Hooper would rather move on because “people are pretty tired of this whole ‘Let’s insult the prophet Muhammad thing.’” They are? I wasn’t aware that there even was a “whole ‘Let’s insult the prophet Muhammad thing.’” It’s not like it was ever a wildly popular fad, since anyone deemed to have insulted Muhammad ordinarily ends up dead or living under 24-hour guard.

Actually Mr. Hooper, what people are pretty tired of is Islamic violence and open intimidation, attacks on our freedoms and rights, and false charges of racism and Islamophobia. What people are pretty tired of, in short, is the whole, “Let’s behead those who insult Islam thing.”

TheLos Angeles Times claimsthat such threats present a dilemma for media companies, who are “struggling to balance free speech with safety concerns and religious sensitivities.” This is giving them way too much credit. The media and the entertainment industry care absolutely nothing about religious sensitivities; if anything, they normally delight in mocking and sneering at faith, especially Christianity. But they treat Islam with kid gloves because, as Fox’s Bill O’Reilly said, “these people are killers and they will kill you.”

Nor do media companies care about free speech except when it suits them. They shut down politically inconvenient truths, such as Disney/ABC’s shameful suppression of The Path to 9/11 miniseries, which I have written abouthere. And they fold (like a Bedouin tent, asMark Steyn hilariously put it) at the first hint of Muslim disapproval. No amount of Christian offense would compel Comedy Central to rein in South Park’s depiction of Jesus defecating on the American flag, but in the wake of the Revolution Muslim threat,Comedy Central decided to bleep over any subsequent reference to “Prophet Muhammad,” and his visual portrayal was replaced with a black “Censored” bar. There’s a reason Islam means “submission,” and Comedy Central has exemplified it.

And as for media companies’ “safety concerns”: every time they cave in to Islamist threats of violence, the terrorists win, as the corny saying goes. It quite simply encourages our enemy to ramp up the threats, which then endangers even more innocents.

The OIC boasted about “red lines that should not be crossed” – well, the time has come for Hollywood to stop placating these murderous zealots in its usual way, with knee-jerk self-censorship, and to draw a line in the sand of our own, against religious totalitarianism. In theabsence of any government acknowledgementthat fundamentalist Islam is a serious threat to our way of life, the entertainment industry must rally behind Parker and Stone, and take the lead in a cultural counteroffensive against the jihadists.

Unless Americans stand shoulder-to-shoulder against such assaults on our hard-won Western values, Islamic fundamentalists will continue to be more effective at importing sharia law than we are at exporting democracy. We must stand for our principles and freedoms with an even greater degree of unwavering fervor and cultural pride than the jihadists possess. Or make no mistake, we will all be witness to the slow, humiliating death of Western civilization.

The news items, blogs, educational materials and other information in our emails and on our website are only intended to provide information, news and commentary on events and issues related to the threat of radical Islam. Much of this information is based upon media sources, such as the AP wire services, newspapers, magazines, books, online news blog and news services, and radio and television, which we deem to be reliable. However, we have undertaken no independent investigation to verify the accuracy of the information reported by these media sources. We therefore disclaim all liability for false or inaccurate information from these media sources. We also disclaim all liability for the third-party information that may be accessed through the material referenced in our emails or posted on our website.

A Dallas man describing himself as a terrorist threatened to kill President Barack Obama in an online posting because he was upset about health care reform, according to a criminal complaint.Brian Dean Miller, 43, faces one count of making threats against the president, which carries a maximum sentence of five years in prison and a [...]

Anti-terror police units are on a desperate hunt to track down Indian Mujahideen hideouts and neutralize sleeper cells said to be preparing for a major attack in the city.Intelligence inputs on the ‘imminent threat’ and a group of IM operatives sneaking into Bengal have sent the administration into battle mode. There have been several high-level [...]

Gunmen stormed into a bar, dragged out eight people and killed them in the parking lot, the first of several shootings in this violent border city Wednesday that left 16 dead, including a man in a wheelchair.In one incident, a car chase and shootout killed three people in front of an elementary school, creating a [...]

The Washington post and several other news sources report that a Russian company is marketing a devastating new cruise missile system which can be hidden inside a shipping container. According to the Post story, the system would provide any merchant vessel the capability to potentially wipe out an aircraft carrier.Potential customers for the formidable Club-K [...]

http://muslimbrotherhoodinamerica.com/the-course/

The Organization of Islamic Cooperation and its Role in Enforcing Islamic Law

We need to get off Saudi Barbarian OIL!!!!!Support the Canadian OIL Sands,,, and visit,, Ethicaloil.org

The gravity of the existential threat we face from Islamic Jihad is truly of epic proportions. It is essentially a battle pitting free-civilized man against a totalitarian barbarian. What is at stake is the struggle for our very soul - namely who we are and what we represent. The lives that were sacrificed for individual rights and freedoms that we've come to cherish are being chiseled away from right under our noses by the stealth jihadists. And many of us are in denial and totally clueless.

The left's appeasement and pandering to evil is nothing new. What makes their utopian delusions so infuriating and unpardonable is that it is not only they who will have to pay the consequences, and deservedly, so, they are thwarting and undermining our best efforts at resistance and are thus dragging us down in the process as well.